Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Wednesday September 12 2018, @04:41AM   Printer-friendly
from the they-can't-hear-you dept.

PC World has an article on why USB-C has not been a viable alternative for the 3.5mm audio jack. Problems with USB-C include variable handling of digital to audio conversion, incompatible SOCs inside the cable, and non-standard analog-passthrough. In short, the cables which contain computers themselves are not standardized in behavior and the author's conclusion is that mobile devices must have 3.5mm jacks until the USB-C cable technology gets sorted out enough that they become usable.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Wednesday September 12 2018, @02:05PM (2 children)

    by Immerman (3985) on Wednesday September 12 2018, @02:05PM (#733595)

    Sure there's a downside, based in the fact that the signal to your ears MUST be analog, ears don't speak digital.

    So, at some point you need to turn that digital signal to analog, and a high quality DAC is moderately bulky and expensive - it requires non-miniaturizable analog components and has all sorts of electrical sensitivities that simply aren't relevant to pure-digital electronics. So where do you put that piece of moderately expensive electronics? Your choices are:

    1) In your generally expensive music device, where a high-end DAC will increase the overall cost by a percent or two, or
    2) In your generally cheap headphones, where even a mediocre DAC (plus supporting electronics) can easily double the price, while introducing tons of analog noise due to its comparatively low quality?

    I'll pick (1) every time for corded applications, especially since minimal cheap cable shielding can almost completely prevent the accumulation of radio noise over the short distances involved.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by KilroySmith on Thursday September 13 2018, @12:36AM (1 child)

    by KilroySmith (2113) on Thursday September 13 2018, @12:36AM (#733929)

    In a world that drives the cost of cell phone components to zero, you will never get analog audio out of the phone that meets the quality standards of the golden-eared audiophile. Analog audio from the phone will be subject to the lowest-bid pressures of building 50,000,000 phones a year. As long as the phone can transfer your FLAC files digitally to your headset unmodified, it allows the golder-eared to pay for the headsets that meet their needs, while those with tin ears can get by with $20 headsets.

    But, today, Bluetooth doesn't have the bandwidth to send FLAC to a headset.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 13 2018, @05:42PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 13 2018, @05:42PM (#734347)

      Your lowest cost audio amp argument doesn't apply to nice (expensive) phones like the iPhone.
      They sell on a perception of quality.
      And you hold hope that by buying expensive headphones you can have a quality signal... why not just buy a quality phone.
      You have to pay for quality one way or another...